The address given last week by Mons. Guido Marini, master of pontifical liturgical ceremonies, to an international Clergy Conference in Rome continues to draw comments for his direct language in referring to the incomplete and often distorted execution of the Second Vatican Council's indications for liturgical reform. Full text posted in the CHURCH&VATICAN THREAD:
benedettoxviforum.freeforumzone.leonardo.it/discussione.aspx?idd=8593...
There is an urgent need to reaffirm the “authentic” spirit of the liturgy, such as it is present in the uninterrupted tradition of the Church, and attested, in continuity with the past, in the most recent Magisterial teachings: starting from the Second Vatican Council up to the present pontificate.
I purposefully used the word continuity, a word very dear to our present Holy Father. He has made it the only authoritative criterion whereby one can correctly interpret the life of the Church, and more specifically, the conciliar documents, including all the proposed reforms contained in them.
How could it be any different? Can one truly speak of a Church of the past and a Church of the future as if some historical break in the body of the Church had occurred? Could anyone say that the Bride of Christ had lived without the assistance of the Holy Spirit in a particular period of the past, so that its memory should be erased, purposefully forgotten?
Nevertheless at times it seems that some individuals are truly partisan to a way of thinking that is justly and properly defined as an ideology, or rather a preconceived notion applied to the history of the Church which has nothing to do with the true faith.
An example of the fruit produced by that misleading ideology is the recurrent distinction between the pre-conciliar and the post conciliar Church. Such a manner of speaking can be legitimate, but only on condition that two Churches are not understood by it: one, the pre- Conciliar Church, that has nothing more to say or to give because it has been surpassed, and a second, the post-conciliar church, a new reality born from the Council and, by its presumed spirit, not in continuity with its past....
The authentic spirit of the liturgy does not abide when it is not approached with serenity, leaving aside all polemics with respect to the recent or remote past. The liturgy cannot and must not be an opportunity for conflict between those who find good only in that which came before us, and those who, on the contrary, almost always find wrong in what came before.
The only disposition which permits us to attain the authentic spirit of the liturgy, with joy and true spiritual relish, is to regard both the present and the past liturgy of the Church as one patrimony in continuous development.
A spirit, accordingly, which we must receive from the Church and is not a fruit of our own making. A spirit, I add, which leads to what is essential in the liturgy, or, more precisely, to prayer inspired and guided by the Holy Spirit, in whom Christ continues to become present for us today, to burst forth into our lives. Truly, the spirit of the liturgy is the liturgy of the Holy Spirit.
- Mons, Guido Marini
The Vatican, 1/7/09
Mons. Marini often cited Cardinal Ratzinger/ Benedict XVI in the address which once again placed into context the liturgical modifications gradually re-introduced by the Holy Father to the papal liturgies by way of example. Two Catholic writers reacted this way:
Messori and Melloni on
Benedict XVI's liturgical reforms
Translated from
January 9, 2009
Vittorio Messori tells
Il Foglio that Joseph Ratzinger "has at heart the problem of the faith - how to live it and how to safeguard it".
He points out that he made this clear to the bishops of the world in his letter accompanying the Motu proprio
Summorum Pontificum: "Even as we hold conference, the faith is dying out like a lamp that has run out of oil".
And that is why, Messori says, the liturgy is important to the Pope: 'Because the liturgy is the expression of the faith in prayer. Lex orandi, lex credendi - one prays as one believes. And the faith, in liturgy, becomes worship."
Therefore, because the liturgy expresses the faith of the Church, "the Pope wants the liturgy to express orthodox faith". And that is why the post-Conciliar liturgical reform effected by a committee has not convinced him: "Moreover, it has never happened before that liturgical reform [in the universal Church] did not originate with the faithful."
[Which is the reason any liturgical innovations took decades to be incorporated into the Church's liturgy. And why the last great liturgical reform , that carried out by the Council of Trent in the 16th century, stipulated that local liturgies could only be valid if they had been followed for at least 200 years.]
According to Msssori, Benedict XVI will arrive at "reforming the et-et of liturgy". [
Et-et (and-and) in religious language refers to the additive, selectively inclusive nature of the Church.]
Which means, he is not returning all the way back to tradition but will work so that old and new can live together: "The canon [standard and fixed prayers] of the Mass will return to being said in Latin, while the parts shared by the priest and the congregation will continue to be said in the vernacular. And Mass will be celebrated with certain parts ad orientem and others ad populum".
A dissenting opinion comes from Alberto Melloni, an ultra-liberal Catholic who is one of the leading ideological advocates of Vatican-II having created a 'new' Church.
He claims it is not correct to speak of a liturgical reform in the Ratzinger Pontificate.
He told
Il Foglio: "The changes that the Pope has made in the liturgy are those of a pastor who intends to use all the liberty that the Missal allows in order to re-interpret it in a restoration sense".
[That's willfully blind ideology speaking! How can it be 'restoration' when he continues to employ the structure of the Novus Ordo?]
He believes that "what the Pope is doing is
not to reform the liturgy that Vatican-II handed down but a legitimate attempt to adapt the liturgy to his own taste".
{What an outrageous statement! As if Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI had ever considered liturgy a matter of the celebrant's personal tastes! All the contrary. It would be more correct to say that his liturgical changes represent his interpretation of the letter and spirit of Sacrosanctum concilium, the liturgical constitution of Vatican-II.
Can Melloni point to a single change introduced by Benedict XVI that is not in full compliance with Sacrosanctum concilium? The problem is that Melloni and his fellow-traveler bishops and priests seem not to have read that document at all, because many of the practices they introduced into the Novus Ordo openly violate it.]
He claims that many priests are erroneously trying to interpret Benedict XVI's changes
as they please.
[But there is nothing to interpret - the Holy Father is setting the example. All they have to do is follow it, if they wish to achieve the holiness and spirituality that pervade the Pope's liturgies.]
"If the Pope intends a reform of the reform, he would say so openly. He is not someone who masks his actions. He has always been clear and explicit in his decisions. It is true we have seen him celebrate Mass ad orientem - but he does so in his private chapel, not in public".
Everything is wrong with that statement. First, if Melloni ever bothered to read Sacramentum caritatis, the Pope's post-Synodal Exhortation on the Eucharist, his references to the provisions in Sacrosanctum concilium that have been ignored or violated are quite explicit and forceful.
And how many discourses has Benedict XVI given on the liturgy that reiterate the ideas he expressed as cardinal on the proper liturgy as worship and expression of the faith, not some sort of 'performance art' cum Sunday get-together that is open to any participant's creativity!
The changes the Pope has introduced into the liturgies he celebrates do not require a separate papal document to promulgate because they are already inherent in what Sacrosdanctum concilium decreed.
Finally, the Masses said in the Sistine Chapel - which are televised worldwide - are certainly public. And of course, the Sistine Chapel is not now the Pope's private chapel in any way!
Perhaps because it is also the 'piece de resistance' of the Vatican Museums, as well as the site for various secular gatherings and, of course, of papal, conclaves, it is not included in the list of 'Papal Basilicas and Chapels' as are the Redemptoris Mater chapel, for instance, and the newly restored Pauline Chapel (no subsite has been created for it yet, but the Pope celebrated Mass there recently with the members of the International Theological Commission).
[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 12/01/2010 00:39]